kmradke_at_rockwellcollins.com wrote:
> Julian Foad <julianfoad_at_btopenworld.com> wrote on 01/06/2010 10:16:55 AM:
>
> > Greg Hudson wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2010-01-04 at 11:31 -0500, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> > > > "To be a compelling replacement for git/Mercurial", perhaps?
> > >
> > > That seems tough.
> >
> > Heh. A vision that's simple to attain is hardly a vision.
>
> I personally think focusing in on an existing DVCS target
> would be a poor "vision". Subversion has grown out
> of the replacement tool phase and should be thinking more
> towards leading.
>
> The question isn't what should Subversion do that git/mercurial
> already do, but what are the users trying to do that DVCS is
> currently solving better than Subversion?
>
> Just being distributed isn't necessarily better. In fact,
> it creates all sorts of problems for enterprises such as
> backups, fine grained security, etc.
>
> Kevin R.
Yes, I totally agree. I was thinking more like "be a solution for the
users who are currently considering Git/Mercurial" rather than "try to
do what Git/Mercurial does".
- Julian
Received on 2010-01-07 02:33:28 CET